Screamscape: Possible Buy Out of Universal for Marvel Theme Park Rights?

[Buried20KLeague]

No, I'm not saying that at all. In fact, I'm at an utter loss as to how any reasonable person could come to that conclusion based on my post. :shrug:

I was talking about the exclusivity of the Marvel/Universal contract and what Disney can and can't do with the Marvel characters in Florida.

Perhaps I was unclear. Basically, people (you included) have been predicting Disney would make use of Marvel characters at WDW since the purchase was announced. Several people (again, you are in this group) have made wildly unspported assertions about the limits of the exclusivity.

Now that we have read the contract and seen that Universal is indeed holding all the cards, you're trying to blame your faulty predictions and assertions on bad press releases. But nothing from the press ever supported your claims.

In my original post, I was trying to make this point without directly calling you out. But I guess it doesn't pay to be indirect.

:lol:

:zipit:

 

[Krack]

Little confused here. How will this play into the Comcast NBC/Universal deal that is in the final phases of completion. Comcast will have a 51% stake in NBC Universal with exclusive rights to the park along with the current existing owner. Then within 7 years Comcast will have 100% of Uni and NBC and I believe 50 % in the parks. This is really getting complicated and at this point keeping a score card is not working either. I am not trying to confuse this thread further, but Comcat is now in the mix as well.

Shouldn't affect the Marvel/Universal deal at all.

 

[Mouse Man]

dont you mean Xfinity?

Actually Comcast is the owner and Xfinity is there brand of products

 

[lazyboy97o]

Shouldn't affect the Marvel/Universal deal at all.

The only way I could see the NBC Universal purchase affecting the deal is if carrying fees were exchanged for a lower buy out price. BUT that gives nothing to The Blackstone Stone, only Comcast and Disney would benefit.

 

[jt04]

No, I'm not saying that at all. In fact, I'm at an utter loss as to how any reasonable person could come to that conclusion based on my post. :shrug:

I was talking about the exclusivity of the Marvel/Universal contract and what Disney can and can't do with the Marvel characters in Florida.

Perhaps I was unclear. Basically, people (you included) have been predicting Disney would make use of Marvel characters at WDW since the purchase was announced. Several people (again, you are in this group) have made wildly unspported assertions about the limits of the exclusivity.

Now that we have read the contract and seen that Universal is indeed holding all the cards, you're trying to blame your faulty predictions and assertions on bad press releases. But nothing from the press ever supported your claims.

In my original post, I was trying to make this point without directly calling you out. But I guess it doesn't pay to be indirect.

I certainly did not make up the rumor that Disney could use any character at WDW that is not used at IoA. Even you were asserting the same thing until recently. My guess is the truth is somewhere in between. Since I can't read more than two lines of lawyer-speak without going into a coma, I will take kracks word for it. But there could have been amendments clauses etc added that are not available. The information I mention above came from somewhere and certainly did not come from me. So you would be calling out the wrong person. But what is new.

Anyway, me pounding away at the rumor caused someone to go to the trouble of finding the information, posting it and then explaining the details so we could all know the truth. Because, ultimately, that is what we are seeking here. At least I am.

 

[lazyboy97o]

But there could have been amendments clauses etc added that are not available.

An amendment was posted as well. These documents must be filed with the SEC. Neither the Marvel nor the Harry Potter deals were leaked, they were and are available to any member of the public.

 

[jt04]

An amendment was posted as well. These documents must be filed with the SEC. Neither the Marvel nor the Harry Potter deals were leaked, they were and are available to any member of the public.

Even the media? Because someone reported many things that now seem to be untrue.



PS- I usually try to quote another's entire post and then either bold the important text or add comments in red especially if by editing the post it changes the meaning. Just saying.

 

[Captain Chaos]

jt, you are right... There were plenty of people here, including those "in the know" who stated Disney could use any Marvel character NOT depicted in IOA... By depicted, it was described as having a walk around character, ride, just a card board cut out, or a painted image on a mural... so you must definitely were not the one who started this... And I am sure you aren't the only one who believed this... I can say for certain, after reading other people one here stating what I just mentioned above, I even believed Disney could use any one of the 5,000 plus characters that are NOT depicted in IOA...

I believe Iger even started as much, in not so many words??

 

[MiklCraw4d]

I didn't see any respectable news source that got the details wrong. Just a lot of posters who aggressively ignored or spun the facts to suit their agendas.

I find it nearly impossible to believe that would ever happen in these parts

 

[flavious27]

Little confused here. How will this play into the Comcast NBC/Universal deal that is in the final phases of completion. Comcast will have a 51% stake in NBC Universal with exclusive rights to the park along with the current existing owner. Then within 7 years Comcast will have 100% of Uni and NBC and I believe 50 % in the parks. This is really getting complicated and at this point keeping a score card is not working either. I am not trying to confuse this thread further, but Comcat is now in the mix as well.

Why would it matter? Disney bought Marvel and it didn't change the terms.

The only thing complicated with ownership with USF is that blackstone owns a 50% share, 70% of legloand and 100% of seawworld and busch gardens. Blackstone bought their share for $250 million in 2000, it is doubtful that comcast has the cash to buy them out or for blackstone give up a property that has increased its value this year.

Comcast owning the other half of the property could bring a CSN style espn zone to city walk, with a better business plan than disney had with espn zone.

 

[jt04]

jt, you are right... There were plenty of people here, including those "in the know" who stated Disney could use any Marvel character NOT depicted in IOA... By depicted, it was described as having a walk around character, ride, just a card board cut out, or a painted image on a mural... so you must definitely were not the one who started this... And I am sure you aren't the only one who believed this... I can say for certain, after reading other people one here stating what I just mentioned above, I even believed Disney could use any one of the 5,000 plus characters that are NOT depicted in IOA...

I believe Iger even started as much, in not so many words??

Thank you. I knew I didn't start the rumor. But that didn't stop some from trying to act like I did. That is just a technique. Seen it before. Yawn.

:wave:

 

[lebeau]

jt, you are right... There were plenty of people here, including those "in the know" who stated Disney could use any Marvel character NOT depicted in IOA... By depicted, it was described as having a walk around character, ride, just a card board cut out, or a painted image on a mural... so you must definitely were not the one who started this... And I am sure you aren't the only one who believed this... I can say for certain, after reading other people one here stating what I just mentioned above, I even believed Disney could use any one of the 5,000 plus characters that are NOT depicted in IOA...

I believe Iger even started as much, in not so many words??

Um, no, he didn't. He said 1. Disney would honor the deal with Universal (because, they have no choice) and 2. Disney would look into their options for using Marvel characters in their parks (like what Lee is refering to over seas).

I'm not saying jt specifically invented the misinformation which was spread on the boards. Merely that he is one of the people who participated in spreading it. He sticks out in my mind largely because he repeatedly stated that everyone who disagreed with him did not understand the terms of the deal. One need look no further than this thread for evidence of that.

You're really making my point for me. It was people on the forums and not the press who got the details wrong. A bunch of fans kept feeding misinformation to each other until they all believed they had read it from a reliable news source. Apparently, they even managed to convince you that Iger went on the record in some vague way.

It's neither here nor there. We know the facts now. I am very thankful to the poster who went to the trouble of hunting down the contracts. People posting misinformation about the Marvel deal has been a pet peeve of mine.

 

[lebeau]

I certainly did not make up the rumor that Disney could use any character at WDW that is not used at IoA.

Never said you made it up. Just that you participated repeatedly and vocally in spreading the misinformation as though it was fact.

Even you were asserting the same thing until recently.

I most certainly was not!

The information I mention above came from somewhere and certainly did not come from me. So you would be calling out the wrong person. But what is new.

No, I think I've got the right guy. I was calling out anyone who spread misinformation as fact. And by your own admission, that's what you've done.

To say you got your "information" (which was wrong) from "somewhere" is laughable. You've been telling others that they don't understand the terms of the Marvel deal for a year now and when called upon you can't remember your sources. You try to throw the press under the bus, but really you just fed on internet rumors.

You're certainly not the only one. So I'm not going to single you out. Like I said, I was trying to be indirect so as not to get you on the defensive. But that didn't exactly work out the way I had hoped.

Anyway, me pounding away at the rumor caused someone to go to the trouble of finding the information, posting it and then explaining the details so we could all know the truth. Because, ultimately, that is what we are seeking here. At least I am.

By "pounding away at the rumor" I assume you mean that you continually and repeatedly mistated the facts? Somehow, I'm not giving you a lot of credit for spreading misinformation repeatedly until someone finally felt the need to prove you wrong.

 

[jt04]

Never said you made it up. Just that you participated repeatedly and vocally in spreading the misinformation as though it was fact.

Because I sincerely thought it was a fact.




No, I think I've got the right guy. I was calling out anyone who spread misinformation as fact. And by your own admission, that's what you've done.

Because it was posted and by more than one person with credibility and nobody refuted it at the time. At least in any substantive way.

To say you got your "information" (which was wrong) from "somewhere" is laughable. You've been telling others that they don't understand the terms of the Marvel deal for a year now and when called upon you can't remember your sources. You try to throw the press under the bus, but really you just fed on internet rumors.

You're certainly not the only one. So I'm not going to single you out. Like I said, I was trying to be indirect so as not to get you on the defensive. But that didn't exactly work out the way I had hoped.

:lol: That is not the first time I have heard this. Plain english works best with me.


By "pounding away at the rumor" I assume you mean that you continually and repeatedly mistated the facts? Somehow, I'm not giving you a lot of credit for spreading misinformation repeatedly until someone finally felt the need to prove you wrong.

You should be giving me credit but that is enough said about that.

PS- I enjoy being proven wrong more than being proven right. Because if I am proven right about something I have not really gained anything. But when I am proven wrong I likely have gained something of value I did not have before. :animwink:

Krack made me smarter. He gave me something of value :xmas: and he has me on ignore. :lol:

Irony. :lookaroun

:king:

 

[Captain Chaos]

Um, no, he didn't. He said 1. Disney would honor the deal with Universal (because, they have no choice) and 2. Disney would look into their options for using Marvel characters in their parks (like what Lee is refering to over seas).

I'm not saying jt specifically invented the misinformation which was spread on the boards. Merely that he is one of the people who participated in spreading it. He sticks out in my mind largely because he repeatedly stated that everyone who disagreed with him did not understand the terms of the deal. One need look no further than this thread for evidence of that.

You're really making my point for me. It was people on the forums and not the press who got the details wrong. A bunch of fans kept feeding misinformation to each other until they all believed they had read it from a reliable news source. Apparently, they even managed to convince you that Iger went on the record in some vague way.

It's neither here nor there. We know the facts now. I am very thankful to the poster who went to the trouble of hunting down the contracts. People posting misinformation about the Marvel deal has been a pet peeve of mine.

Well, I never said the press misinformed everyone... I got my information on here.. And I surely didn't get it from jt... I take everything he says with a grain of salt, and as a figment of his own imagination (or wishes)... But I know I read the misinformation from "people in the know" on here, and probably another site or two... And no one convinced me that Iger said something... THAT I read in an article of two or three... also, this is a year ago... I don't remember EXACTLY what was read word for word... I know, if the year this has been discussed, remembering what I read from the "informed" on here and the many articles with Iger's quotes, I surmised what many Disney fans all over the internet surmised... And we also believed the only reason we wouldn't see some form of Marvel in WDW was because TDO was cheap and wouldn't put one of the 5,000 characters Disney has access to into WDW, excluding the ones Universal as exclusive rights to..

But you are right, it is neither here nor there... And no use going back and forth... The facts are out there and obviosly people "in the know" got the information wrong as well...

With that said, this thread has run its course....

 

[trr1]

Well, I never said the press misinformed everyone... I got my information on here.. And I surely didn't get it from jt... I take everything he says with a grain of salt, and as a figment of his own imagination (or wishes)... But I know I read the misinformation from "people in the know" on here, and probably another site or two... And no one convinced me that Iger said something... THAT I read in an article of two or three... also, this is a year ago... I don't remember EXACTLY what was read word for word... I know, if the year this has been discussed, remembering what I read from the "informed" on here and the many articles with Iger's quotes, I surmised what many Disney fans all over the internet surmised... And we also believed the only reason we wouldn't see some form of Marvel in WDW was because TDO was cheap and wouldn't put one of the 5,000 characters Disney has access to into WDW, excluding the ones Universal as exclusive rights to..

But you are right, it is neither here nor there... And no use going back and forth... The facts are out there and obviosly people "in the know" got the information wrong as well...

With that said, this thread has run its course....

:lookaroun nice way to say "thread closed":animwink::lol:

 

[ChrisFL]

With that said, this thread has run its course....

....5 pages ago...

 

[Studios Fan]

It's neither here nor there. We know the facts now. I am very thankful to the poster who went to the trouble of hunting down the contracts. People posting misinformation about the Marvel deal has been a pet peeve of mine.

I was glad I found it. The misinformation has been a pet peeve of mine as well.

I still think long-term Disney would be smart to buyout the deal if the price was right. It might be cost prohibitive as Lee has said, but I think long-term it would make sense. The only thing the contract doesn't tell us is how much Disney (via Marvel) is actually getting from Universal. If it was a smaller amount then I would think it makes more sense to do a buyout. Universal could re-theme the land and have Disney pay for it.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Universal could re-theme the land and have Disney pay for it.

This is where it gets really expensive for Disney. They will be paying for something big and new to replace Marvel Superhero Island, a nice little extra profit and the cost to build at Walt Disney World. It will be hard to justify paying out enough for a whole new land just to build some meet and greet shelters.

 

[flavious27]

Universal could re-theme the land and have Disney pay for it.

That is as likely to happen as dianey buying an ownership share of the property from comcast..